Maybe the Vegetarians Have It Right?

"Eating beef ' is less green than driving' "

Producing 2.2lb of beef generates as much greenhouse gas as driving a car non-stop for three hours, it was claimed yesterday.

Japanese scientists used a range of data to calculate the environmental impact of a single purchase of beef. Taking into account all the processes involved, they said, four average sized steaks generated greenhouse gases with a warming potential equivalent to 80.25lb of carbon dioxide.

This also consumed 169 megajoules of energy. That means that 2.2lb of beef is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions which have the same effect as the carbon dioxide released by an ordinary car travelling at 50 miles per hour for 155 miles, a journey lasting three hours. The amount of energy consumed would light a 100-watt bulb for 20 days.

Most of the greenhouse gas emissions are in the form of methane released from the animals' digestive systems, New Scientist magazine reported. But more than two thirds of the energy used goes towards producing and transporting cattle feed, said the study, which was led by Akifumi Ogino from the National Institute of Livestock and Grassland Science in Tsukuba, Japan.

Sue Taylor, the press officer for the Vegetarian Society, told New Scientist: "Everybody is trying to come up with different ways to reduce carbon footprints, but one of the easiest things you can do is to stop eating meat."

Yet another way we can make small changes to improve our quality of life in the long run...

Shopping Is NOT a Solution

This website is in response to campaigns such as Gap's RED campaign, which attempted to raise money for Africa, but ended up being a HUGE failure... (After spending $100 million, the campaign only raised about $20 million)...

The truth is, if you want to help, the best thing to do is to be proactive. Get out there and effect change. However, if you are going to donate, do your research and donate to a legitimate organization that will properly handle your donation.

Buying a T-Shirt from the GAP may be the more glitzy thing to do, but a direct donation goes a lot further.

To make a difference, give. Give of yourself, your time, your efforts, your funds. Giving goes further than shopping.

The Power of Mindfulness

"Mindfulness" is the practice of focusing one's self in the present. Things like paying attention to your mood, heart rate, temperature, stress level, etc. By focusing like this you recognize things that may have escaped you previously or feelings you may be ignoring. Many people practice mindfulness as part of meditation.

Recently researchers at UCLA compared those who were more "mindful" to those who were not by monitoring their brain activity. Their finding was that those were more mindful experienced less negative emotions and showed greater calmness in their brain activity.

So based on this research we know that mindfulness works, but what it doesn't tell you is that it is not easy. It takes discipline and focus. When we are busy with deadlines, errands, and are bombarded by the information that surrounds us every day, it becomes quite difficult to focus on the present and on one's self. As a result some of us neglect ourselves to a point of extreme emotional discomfort that goes beyond the point that a little mindfulness each day can clear up. That is why we need to remember to be mindful everyday, even if just for a few minutes. You may already do this and not even know it. Possibly when you walking, cooking, or taking a shower part of your mind wanders into thinking about your current state. Remember the importance of these times especially when the more stressful moments arise.

Fat Tax

"LONDON (Reuters) - A "fat tax" on salty, sugary and fatty foods could save thousands of lives each year, according to a study published on Thursday. Researchers at Oxford University say that charging Value Added Tax (VAT) at 17.5 percent on foods deemed to be unhealthy would cut consumer demand and reduce the number of heart attacks and strokes."

A fat tax? Funny idea, maybe a good one though. I am usually against the government interfering with people's freedoms. I'm the first to say that people need to take personal responsibility for what they eat. However, as this article points out, this tax would hit the poorest groups the hardest. They try to use this as a point against the fat tax when in actuality it is the most important reason we need it. Lower socioeconomic groups also suffer the most from poor diets. The truth is that most inexpensive foods (i.e. fast foods) are also the most unhealthy, while healthy, fresh foods are significantly more expensive (been to Whole Foods lately?) making them inaccessible to the poor.

The point is that everyones got to eat but the poor have far less healthy options (ever seen a Whole Foods in Watts, or Compton?). Couldn't a tax like this be used to tilt the scales the other way? Possibly, tax unhealthy food and subsidize wholesome options???

Oh, and if you were wondering about why this matters to people like you and I, I can tell you that the increased health care costs of the poor come out of our tax dollars, which are directly related to diet and other lifestyle differences.

Models Banned for Being Too Skinny

"I absolutely don't want models who are too skinny... They are a bad example for young generations." Explained designer Raffaella Curiel who fired 15 models from her show in Rome because they were too skinny, complying with a fashion code signed by the Italian industry last year to combat anorexia.

I had never heard about this ban that came in the wake of a 21-year-old Brazilian model's death from anorexia a month earlier. At the time of her death the 5-foot-8 inch model weighed 88 pounds.

We all obviously understand the reasoning behind these new regulations but I am curious to know about the weight and height of the 15 models banned form the show. I mean where do you draw the line? I think anorexia and other eating disorders have a lot more to do with self-confidence and satisfaction than creating a certain appearance. Maybe this is the first step to make improvements or possibly a inane stab at addressing a problem that is more complex than we perceive it to be from the outside in.

Real Estate Reset

I know that most readers are aware that we are in a housing downturn after years of record setting home sales. Soon we will see how far this downturn will go.

Many, many people who purchased homes over the past 6 years did so through the use of an Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM). As I'm sure you know, the interest rates on ARMs are based on the established interest rates at the times meaning they fluctuate. Well, now many of these loans are set to reset to much higher interest rates in the coming months; more than 2 million of them to be more precise. This means that the interest rates on these loans could jump by 35% or more, undoubtedly putting far more financial strain on those who have them. It will be interesting to see what happens...

Why discuss this on this blog? Because people in the US, especially those on the coasts and large cities appear to be short sited. They take ARMs on homes that are beyond their means and give little thought to the consequences 5 or 10 years down the line. This issue does not just concern matters of money. Americans consistently look for quick fixes to lifetime problems. Whether it's liposuction, or get rich quick schemes, we look for ways to avoid hard work and perseverance. The result is a rocky, up and down cycle that leaves us with less than we began with.

I'm convinced that about half of what separates the successful entrepreneurs from the non-successful ones is pure perseverance.
Steve Jobs(1955 - ), Interview, 1995

The Tattoo Issue

"Nearly 50% of Americans between 21 and 32 have at least one tattoo or a piercing other than in an ear, according to a 2006 study by the University of Chicago and Northwestern University. Men and women alike say their tattoos make them feel sexy and rebellious, a 2003 Harris Poll found, while the unadorned of both genders see body art as unsightly and think those with tattoos and piercings are less intelligent and less attractive."

As I mentioned in my previous entry about emergence of Generation X & Y groups into working society, things are changing whether employers and institutions like it or not. Tattoos are becoming more and more popular especially with those who are thought to be creative or expressive types. Yet at the same time employers with "old school" values still find them unprofessional and even offensive.

It's interesting what people choose to judge as bad or no big deal. Simply think about what a tattoo is: A piece of art on someones body. Yet the stereotype that it carries is one that would be wholly unacceptable if it were geared toward something like race, gender or sexual preference. As the article explains, some of the world's largest organizations still have rules prohibit ting the employment of individuals who cannot cover all their tattoos. That is harsh, but I understand why they do it. They are scared that they will loose the business of their conservative customers, who have little else to do with there time then to be upset by someone elses appearance.

Now I know that tat's historically have certain affiliations with those from undesirous groups but when the statistics show that 50% of 21 to 32 year olds have at least one tattoo or a piercing other than in an ear, then perceptions have to change. It's now like all these people of gangsta's, or ex-cons.

Email: "Like bleeding to death from a thousand pinpricks"

http://www.slate.com/id/2165452/nav/tap1/

A great article about the role email plays in modern work and life. Is it true that email "eats away at people's time, a minute at a time... [like] bleeding to death from a thousand pinpricks?"

Or is the following description a little more accurate?

"Many people who are addicted to e-mail are more correctly described as addicted to work. Lots of e-mail makes you feel important. E-mail addicts (like me) fear the empty inbox and, strangely, the potential freedom that e-mail provides. A BlackBerry can make you feel accountable at night, but it also lets you say, play golf, while still monitoring any situation that might come up. When business is conducted through e-mail, it shifts the responsibility of actually working off of the physical setting of the office and back onto you. That lack of structure, or the need to provide your own structure, can be uncomfortable. Still, you often find confident people who are immune to e-mail addiction. They just don't understand what the fuss is about. They check e-mail when they need to; they turn it off when they've got stuff to do. It's a tool that serves them. "

Set yourself some boundaries and follow them. Soon email will serve you as it serves many others.